• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Can one disprove Jesus' resurrection?

Can one disprove Jesus' resurrection?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 34 40.5%

  • No, because you generally cannot prove a negative and it happened too long ago to do so now.

    Votes: 50 59.5%
  • Total voters
    84
  • Poll closed .
DLH said:
I don't know who you are talking to, but all I'm saying is that if you are going to mock, criticize, or question the Bible at least give it a better look than religiosity would allow. I don't think that is so extraordinary. It shouldn't be.
Click to expand...

All you have to do is look at the difference between Mark and Matthew to discredit The Bible as an historical document. Mark gets his geography wrong, and Matthew is more or less a word-for-word copy in some sections, with attempts at correcting the geography and adding a few flourishes (neither The Nativity nor The Resurrection exists in Mark).

If you prefer the Old Testiment... well, there is no indication whatsoever that there were ever Jewish slaves in Egypt. The Egyptians don't mention it at all. Also, there is no hint that we can find with archaeology that there was ever a mass migration out of Egypt as suggested. Those things would be there if it actually happened.

In either case, not knowing the original language, and not having access to the earliest known copies (which are slightly different from later copies) might hinder discovering the textual evidence for yourself. There's quite a lot more problems in there than the ones I mentioned. If you'd like, we could discuss the number of times that the Old Testament was completely rewritten based on extant copies.

...but there are others on this forum that have significantly more expertise than I do, and these things have already been discussed at length in other threads.
 
Last edited:
DLH said:
I said stuff that I wrote, like the Historicity of the Bible. I didn't say I was a Christian, did I. I'm a skeptic.
Click to expand...

DLH said:
1. Jesus existed before he was a man on Earth, as a higher form of intelligent life. Even before the Earth, heaven and universe were created.

2. He had come to Earth in the past as Jehovah God's Word, or spokesman, at various times in the form of various men.

3. Jesus' specific bodily sacrifice was for one time only, and having sacrificed that physical body he couldn't have it back.

4. The angels took that body away.

5. Some of Jesus followers didn't recognize him at first.
Click to expand...

...one of these things is not like the other...
 
DLH said:
I don't know who you are talking to, but all I'm saying is that if you are going to mock, criticize, or question the Bible at least give it a better look than religiosity would allow. I don't think that is so extraordinary. It shouldn't be.
Click to expand...

I was addressing the OP as it happens. And to suggest that a person is killed and returned to life *is* an extraordinary claim bible or no bible.

As it happens I am a lapsed Christian of several decades. I was 'born again' as the result of being brainwashed by evangelicals when I was 16 or 17. One positive..at a stretch..outcome - was that as it happens I know the bible, particularly the NT pretty well.
 
DLH said:
<snip for focus>
They are actually. But that has nothing to do with the topic. Briefly, then, the Greek historian Herodotus, who is sometimes referred to as "the father of history" lived in the fifth century before Christ and he wrote that the Egyptians grew no grapes and drank no wine. Critics scoffed at the Biblical account written by Moses of the cupbearer whose duty it was to supply the wine for Pharaoh's table (Genesis 40:9-13) until archaeologist discovered frescoes which decorate the tombs of Egyptian antiquity which picture the Egyptians caring for vines, gathering grapes, pressing out the juice and storing it in stone jars and skin bottles. One of the murals show an Egyptian party and slaves assisting their drunk masters home.
Click to expand...

I see.

No evidence of "Jewish slaves"; no evidence of an "exodus"; these things mean, to you, that your bible must be TRUETM.
 
DLH said:
They are actually. But that has nothing to do with the topic. Briefly, then, the Greek historian Herodotus, who is sometimes referred to as "the father of history" lived in the fifth century before Christ and he wrote that the Egyptians grew no grapes and drank no wine. Critics scoffed at the Biblical account written by Moses of the cupbearer whose duty it was to supply the wine for Pharaoh's table (Genesis 40:9-13) until archaeologist discovered frescoes which decorate the tombs of Egyptian antiquity which picture the Egyptians caring for vines, gathering grapes, pressing out the juice and storing it in stone jars and skin bottles. One of the murals show an Egyptian party and slaves assisting their drunk masters home.
Click to expand...

Although I'll have to admit I hadn't heard this before, I'm not sure how you think it supports your case.
 
DLH said:
What? No such claim was made by me. The cited passages establish that the Bible indicates clearly that Jesus existed in a pre-human form.
Click to expand...

I apologize. I misread the original post
 
Have another...

In Exodus 9:3-6 god kills all the oxen and the asses and the camels and..well you get the picture.

In Exodus 9:19 he kills them all again despite them already being dead.

Not content with that, in Exodus 12:29 he kills them again because they just weren't dead enough.
 
Have another...

Genesis 1 disagrees with Genesis 2 and both disagree with actual science.

Revelations is clearly some form of drug fuelled rant, but I can forgive it that fault because it actually names me and gives me credit.

Everything between is bollocks.
 
abaddon said:
Have another...

In Exodus 9:3-6 god kills all the oxen and the asses and the camels and..well you get the picture.

In Exodus 9:19 he kills them all again despite them already being dead.

Not content with that, in Exodus 12:29 he kills them again because they just weren't dead enough.
Click to expand...


*Buzz*

What is your just not reading the passages the "right" way.

I'll take apologetics that will be used in this thread for 500$ please.
 
DLH said:
In a later thread.

Meanwhile on the Skeptic's Forum, the verbose pedantic will speak in tongues! Uh . . . In regione caecorum rex est luscus! Er, Nostalgie de la boue! Deus Ex Machina . . .
Click to expand...

How very, very odd. Do you understand what you posted?

Can you demonstrate how the phrases (to be generous) are, in any way, topical?

Do you understand what I posted?

I can demonstrate how an aphorism from my distant youth is, in fact, topical.

I wonder why it is useful to you to try to raise up a diversion. Perhaps " 'god' is on the side with the biggest diversions..."?

Now, about ƴe fludde?
 
Slowvehicle said:
How very, very odd. Do you understand what you posted?

Can you demonstrate how the phrases (to be generous) are, in any way, topical?

Do you understand what I posted?

I can demonstrate how an aphorism from my distant youth is, in fact, topical.

I wonder why it is useful to you to try to raise up a diversion. Perhaps " 'god' is on the side with the biggest diversions..."?

Now, about ƴe fludde?
Click to expand...

God of the gaffes. :p
 
Nay_Sayer said:
*Buzz*

What is your just not reading the passages the "right" way.

I'll take apologetics that will be used in this thread for 500$ please.
Click to expand...

This is a game I can play all night.

It is almost as though he hasn't read the damn book. Surely such a thing could not exist? An atheist who has read it and a theist who has not? Say it ain't so.
 
DLH said:
I said we could discuss the flood later, what do you want from me? This?
Click to expand...

Nope. You laid down a challenge to identify biblical contradictions. The Noachin Flood is oh-so-full of those. For now, I shall refrain from pointing them out since you have a whole bunch more which you have somehow failed to address.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom